Should JMS be given credit with Behr, Berman, Piller, Moore etc

[Kegek]

Re: Should JMS be given credit

The difference between the people behind both shows, is that JMS and other B5 people seem to have no qualms about giving credit to Star Trek, Dune etc and how they inspired JMS and his work etc. but Wolfe, Moore and the people are Paramount only get all emotional when the B5 connection is brought up and IMO this only adds more fuel to the theory a lot of borrowing was going on.

At no point did JMS ever include any screen credit for Frank Herbert or Gene Roddenberry on the show. If you want to equate their influence on B5 with his influence on DS9; then even if your premise is correct the situation should remain as-is.

As for my own stance in the flying hurdle of heated debate; I'm definitely more a Niner in this context. I like B5, it did some things better than DS9, but DS9 is all round the better show. To me whether or not it stole from B5 is immaterial; what matters is that it was good and, frankly, IMHO better entertainment than its competitor; and that B5 itself was also good.

 

[RandyS]

I think it's unfortunate that any discussion of the parallels between the shows is always overshadowed by the need to "place blame" by one group or the other.

Can't we just look at the end products and speculate on possible influences, without it becoming a religious crusade?

Or, can't we just watch the shows, keeping in mind that they've both been over for a decade and forget it?

 

[NKemp3]

[/quote]While I agree that the minds behind DS9 probably didn't intentionally set out to copy B5, there are other factors in play. Who's to say a network suit didn't make some suggestions based on stuff on "that other show", for example?

There are similarities. That much everyone with half a brain can see. Speculation on where those similarities arose from is harmless, and should not be squelched just because some have a tendency to be overly accusatory when discussing them.[/quote]

Then by all means someone address my examples of plot points that DS9 got to first. And don't go the JMS-apologist route by suggesting that JMS came up with those ideas 10 years before DS9 aired, blah, blah, without having some evidence to back it up.

 

[Lindley]

I think it's unfortunate that any discussion of the parallels between the shows is always overshadowed by the need to "place blame" by one group or the other.

Can't we just look at the end products and speculate on possible influences, without it becoming a religious crusade?

Or, can't we just watch the shows, keeping in mind that they've both been over for a decade and forget it?

Apparently not.....I'm suggesting the next best option after that one.

While I agree that the minds behind DS9 probably didn't intentionally set out to copy B5, there are other factors in play. Who's to say a network suit didn't make some suggestions based on stuff on "that other show", for example?

There are similarities. That much everyone with half a brain can see. Speculation on where those similarities arose from is harmless, and should not be squelched just because some have a tendency to be overly accusatory when discussing them.

Then by all means someone address my examples of plot points that DS9 got to first. And don't go the JMS-apologist route by suggesting that JMS came up with those ideas 10 years before DS9 aired, blah, blah, without having some evidence to back it up.

I'm not going to discuss anything with you so long as you're approaching the issue with such a clearly adversarial attitude. Suffice it to say, nothing exists in isolation. There may have been creative bleed-over in both directions.

 

[mahler5]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOo
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I watched this entire self-generated bullshit controversy as it was fabricated on GEnie back during the run-up to both DS9 and B5 (I was a big booster of B5 at the time).

That's what it was and is: bullshit. It did, however, do a little bit to keep the nascent fandom for the as-yet-vaporware B5 focused and probably helped the whole thing avoid sinking without making an impression at the time. Whether it was ever intended to serve any other purpose is hard to say.

The decision about whether to make a real issue of this or not, BTW, was made not by the producers but by Warner Bros. Needless to say, they passed quietly.

 

[NKemp3]

I think it's unfortunate that any discussion of the parallels between the shows is always overshadowed by the need to "place blame" by one group or the other.

Can't we just look at the end products and speculate on possible influences, without it becoming a religious crusade?

Or, can't we just watch the shows, keeping in mind that they've both been over for a decade and forget it?

Apparently not.....I'm suggesting the next best option after that one.

While I agree that the minds behind DS9 probably didn't intentionally set out to copy B5, there are other factors in play. Who's to say a network suit didn't make some suggestions based on stuff on "that other show", for example?

There are similarities. That much everyone with half a brain can see. Speculation on where those similarities arose from is harmless, and should not be squelched just because some have a tendency to be overly accusatory when discussing them.

Then by all means someone address my examples of plot points that DS9 got to first. And don't go the JMS-apologist route by suggesting that JMS came up with those ideas 10 years before DS9 aired, blah, blah, without having some evidence to back it up.

I'm not going to discuss anything with you so long as you're approaching the issue with such a clearly adversarial attitude. Suffice it to say, nothing exists in isolation. There may have been creative bleed-over in both directions.

There was nothing "clearly adversarial" about my comments. No more than your insisting folks are essentially in denial for not sharing your view of DS9 TPTB being influenced by JMS. And my response was directed at anyone who wanted to tackle the examples I put forth, not you in particular. But I guess you had to have your say and then use a copout in order to avoid discussing my points. That's fine and good. Next time though why even take part of such a conversation in the first place if all you end up doing is making an excuse for avoiding a rational argument I made?

 

[Lindley]

There was nothing "clearly adversarial" about my comments.

The phrase "JMS-apologist" isn't adversarial? It sounds defensive to me. The key to discussing this rationally is to avoid defensiveness from any "side" and just talk about it frankly.

No more than your insisting folks are essentially in denial for not sharing your view of DS9 TPTB being influenced by JMS.

Adversarial interpretations of my comments as well, huh? Well, that just goes to show that either I'm not being clear enough, or you're simply looking for an argument. Doesn't really matter which is the dominant factor.

I've taken no side in this debate except to stand against those who hold extreme viewpoints. "DS9 totally ripped off B5" = Obviously false. "B5 totally ripped off DS9" = Obviously false. "There was absolutely no transfer of ideas between the two shows" = Obviously false.

I'm simply trying to say that it might be interesting to talk about which ideas on one show influenced the other, and to what degree. Also where similar creative decisions may have come about as the result of influence from a common source.

But I guess you had to have your say and then use a copout in order to avoid discussing my points.

There are multiple levels of discussion going on. Right now, I'm still working on establishing how I think such discussion should occur. Trying to have the actual discussion at the same time as establishing the context would probably just lead to problems.

 

[Anthony Sabre]

In a word... No.

This "controversy" has been debated many times in this forum.

 

[NKemp3]

There was nothing "clearly adversarial" about my comments.

The phrase "JMS-apologist" isn't adversarial? It sounds defensive to me. The key to discussing this rationally is to avoid defensiveness from any "side" and just talk about it frankly.

It isn't defensive or adverserial. Anyone who suggests that JMS was reponsible for all of DS9 without giving any evidence to back this up is an apologist. This is not saying you fit that description; rather I simply asked that you did not resort to using their tricks when defending a position. Period. Also I am aware that there are Ronald Moore apologists, Rick Berman apologists, Gene Rodenberry apologists and so on. I'm not necessarily taking anything away from those men when I write that they have their share of blind defenders. Although easily my favorite writers of the four are JMS (whose screenplay book I use as a Bible for writing) and Ronald Moore. Only David Simon has produced quality TV that has inspired me more. So don't think of me as a JMS basher.

No more than your insisting folks are essentially in denial for not sharing your view of DS9 TPTB being influenced by JMS.

Adversarial interpretations of my comments as well, huh? [/quote]

No, its just as honest a view of your comments from my perspective as I suppose your view of my so-called hostility is an honest view from your perspective. Are you not somewhat incredulous over people not sharing your opinion on the subject matter at hand? So, how off am I when making that assessment?

Well, that just goes to show that either I'm not being clear enough, or you're simply looking for an argument. Doesn't really matter which is the dominant factor.

I don't post often on these boards these days. But when I do I'm certainly not looking for an argument. If I were I'd be going to the VOY or ENT boards (like I did back in the day) looking for some inane praising of those series and challenging the posters who wrote them. But I've gained some maturity since my first days on this website (either in '99 or 2000) and I'm not trying to intentionally get into a disagreement with fans anymore.

I've taken no side in this debate except to stand against those who hold extreme viewpoints. "DS9 totally ripped off B5" = Obviously false. "B5 totally ripped off DS9" = Obviously false.

I still find it hard to locate any DS9 fan who has the gumption to suggest B5 totally ripped off their favorite Star Trek show.

"There was absolutely no transfer of ideas between the two shows" = Obviously false.

You see unless you were inside the heads of all the people involved with those two shows I can't see how you say that. If by "transfer of ideas'" you mean that both were influenced by the ideas, presentation, storytelling of the other then I am one of those who does not agree with you. And I do not consider myself extreme by thinking this way. After reading all the Q&As and interviews (from magazines, internet and TV interviews) by the folks of both shows when both shows were still on the air, I came away believing all of them when they said they never watched the "other" show or didn't watch more than a couple of episodes of the "other" show. JMS, from various interviews, clearly wasn't interested in watching the Trek show (in part because he was a busy man----a one man tour de force) that he felt stole much of his ideas. The DS9 writers were very open about admitting all the shows and movies that influenced individual episodes and storylines, but were steadfast in pointing out that they did not check out Babylon 5. I believe both groups to this day and refuse to accept that either would be so blatant to intentionally copy an idea or storyline from the other show. I have too much respect for both groups to believe anything else.

I'm simply trying to say that it might be interesting to talk about which ideas on one show influenced the other, and to what degree. Also where similar creative decisions may have come about as the result of influence from a common source.

Its fine to want to talk about it but I think the DS9 fans are kind of weary because of the years of abuse they would take from B5 fans on the subject. And it was abuse. Those of us caught in the middle had to often to reestablish the peace. That being said if you want to have this dicussion you have to also accept that some people are going to disagree with your stance or try to poke holes in some of the examples given.

 

[Navaros]

"There was absolutely no transfer of ideas between the two shows" = Obviously false.

What is the proof for this statement?

 

[Lindley]

I've taken no side in this debate except to stand against those who hold extreme viewpoints. "DS9 totally ripped off B5" = Obviously false. "B5 totally ripped off DS9" = Obviously false.

I still find it hard to locate any DS9 fan who has the gumption to suggest B5 totally ripped off their favorite Star Trek show.

Out of the blue, typically not. When discussing B5, I've seen uninformed people refer to it as "that Star Trek ripoff" based on maybe one episode's exposure; and when these threads come up, someone usually suggests or implies something along those lines, usually more as a return shot than out of any real understanding of the situation. It does happen.

"There was absolutely no transfer of ideas between the two shows" = Obviously false.

You see unless you were inside the heads of all the people involved with those two shows I can't see how you say that.

I've already explained how. Because every show is influenced by those on concurrently with it, even if only in small ways. There was an episode of Veronica Mars where the numbers from Lost showed up, for instance. And heck, there's a B5 blooper clip referring to DS9 directly. It is impossible for a series to be completely, 100% uninfluenced by a "competing" show if one is not produced entirely before the other. Whether that influence is major or minor, that's another issue.

What is the proof for this statement?

Since disproving absolute statements only require a single counterexample, no matter how trivial, I'll simply point out Ivanova's line, "This isn't some deep space franchise, this station is about something!". Fairly irrelevant to the issue at hand? Yes. Sufficient to disprove the notion that there was zero cross-influence? Also yes.

After reading all the Q&As and interviews (from magazines, internet and TV interviews) by the folks of both shows when both shows were still on the air, I came away believing all of them when they said they never watched the "other" show or didn't watch more than a couple of episodes of the "other" show.

Oh, I'm sure that's true of the showrunners. But can you be certain the same is true of every cameraman, writer, prop designer, CG artist, and actor? Storylines don't have to be wholesale borrows for influence to exist.

That said, JMS' long-term plan and extensive personal writing probably reduced the influence in B5's case.

That being said if you want to have this dicussion you have to also accept that some people are going to disagree with your stance or try to poke holes in some of the examples given.

I would hope so. That's the entire point of having a discussion, after all. I simply want it to be done without the normal exaggerations and hostility, if it must be done at all.

I'm sorry if it seems like I'm debating semantics. I feel it's important to get past the "there was no influence at all" mindset before any progress can be made in laying this issue to rest once and for all. If people would prefer to just sweep the question under the rug, that's fine; but it will just keep coming back, it seems.....

 

[Moocey]

In a word... No.

This "controversy" has been debated many times in this forum.

Yes it has.

And kudos to Vash for not clanging this thread.

 

[NKemp3]

[
Out of the blue, typically not. When discussing B5, I've seen uninformed people refer to it as "that Star Trek ripoff" based on maybe one episode's exposure; and when these threads come up, someone usually suggests or implies something along those lines, usually more as a return shot than out of any real understanding of the situation. It does happen.

I've already explained how. Because every show is influenced by those on concurrently with it, even if only in small ways. There was an episode of Veronica Mars where the numbers from Lost showed up, for instance.

You see this is where I have to put up the Stop sign. The creators behind shows like Veronica Mars and guys like Josh Wheddon (sp?) were very open about their love for current shows like "Lost" and vice versa. They would communicate this towards fans all the time and on their shows would at times even put in little "shout outs" directed at rival shows they admired. However my argument is that you never got such feedback from JMS and the DS9 gang regarding their rival shows. Never. Not even a sense of a healthy-rivalry. They seemed to go out of their way to ignore each other.

Now JMS was very open about his being influenced by the original Trek and you will read comments from Ronald Moore in which he admits to trying to measure up to shows like "The Sopranos" while at the same time NOT watching any current sci-fi shows. But the two groups never seemed to have watched each other's series when they were on the air at the same time. Hell, Moore told the press that he had to catch up with VOY's first four or so seasons when he temporarily joined the VOY writing staff after DS9 ended. He had to catch up because he didn't watch even a fellow Trek show (VOY) that was filmed on the same lot as DS9 and produced and written by some of his closest colleagues in the industry. So knowing that makes it even easier for me to accept that Moore didn't watch B5 either.

That being said Patricia Tallman (who not only played Lyta on B5 but was an extra and stuntsperson for Trek shows early on) is an example of an individual who watched both shows. But I don't buy into the notion that someone like her or an art director influences one series based upon what they knew about the other series. But that's just my opinion.

 

[Lindley]

The only thing I'm trying to say is that, despite the best intentions of those in charge, it's impossible that some ideas didn't leak across the gap. Whether those ideas had major, minor, or negligible influences on the direction of each show is a separate matter....but they had to have been there.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

The "Deep Space Franchise" line was from an episode written by Peter David - who may have watched a "Star Trek" episode or two in his day - and was a deliberate joke about the similarities between the two shows.

On its best week, B5 didn't reach more than a fraction of DS9's audience; there's certainly no reason for writers to borrow stuff from shows that are far less successful than their own. I doubt that after the manufactured brouhaha before either show premiered that the DS9 folks would have intentionally borrowed a pronoun from Warner Bros. And yeah, it's easy to believe that the DS9 writers didn't watch B5 - it just puts them in the same viewing category as almost the entire rest of the American public.

 

[Navaros]

Since disproving absolute statements only require a single counterexample, no matter how trivial, I'll simply point out Ivanova's line, "This isn't some deep space franchise, this station is about something!". Fairly irrelevant to the issue at hand? Yes. Sufficient to disprove the notion that there was zero cross-influence? Also yes.

I would say if anything that statement underscores exactly how much the shows had no influence on each other. That statement by Ivanova falsely implies that DS9 was merely an episodic show that is not about anything, which of course, is incorrect. This illustrates that the makers of B5 had no clue about what the content of DS9 entails, because if they did they instead would have had made a dig at DS9 that attacked DS9's content in an accurate way. This point is also underscored by the aforementioned quote by JMS where he also attacked DS9's content in an inaccurate way when he said: "It was a five year long epic set on a massive space station at the hub of a galactic war, with stories about stuff that makes the "Star Trek" writers cower: religion, homosexuality the media, politics....". All things which DS9 writers did indeed happen to write about on DS9, yet it appears JMS thought they didn't because he apparentely didn't know much of anything about the content of DS9.

I don't see how the leap can be made from "knowing about the existence of another space station show, and knowing the show's name" to "the transfer of ideas between the two shows".

Is there a better example of proof of ideas being transferred between the two shows?

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

That statement by Ivanova falsely implies that DS9 was merely an episodic show that is not about anything, which of course, is incorrect. This illustrates that the makers of B5 had no clue about what the content of DS9 entails, because if they did they instead would have had made a dig at DS9 that attacked DS9's content in an accurate way.

It was a joke, written by Peter David...who much did and does have a clue what the content of DS9 - and every other Trek series - entails.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

That statement by Ivanova falsely implies that DS9 was merely an episodic show that is not about anything, which of course, is incorrect. This illustrates that the makers of B5 had no clue about what the content of DS9 entails, because if they did they instead would have had made a dig at DS9 that attacked DS9's content in an accurate way.

It was a joke, written by Peter David...

...which was not, IMHO, funny.

And even so: I doubt Navaros was the only one who interpreted, or could interpret, that line as a mean-spirited attack. In fact, I know of at least one other person who did.

 

[Navaros]

Exactly, not a funny joke, because for a joke to be funny, it has to have a grain of truth to it. The grain of truth is the core of what makes any joke funny. Jokes with zero truth to them, as this DS9 joke was, are not funny and fail as jokes. Therefore IMO it does indeed speak to the B5 makers not knowing anything about the content of DS9, because surely they realized the basic principles of jokes 101, yet their DS9 joke didn't follow those principles. Had they made a joke that took a dig at the Bajoran religious episodes or Zek/Moogie or something like that, then that indeed could have been a good, funny joke since it's based on true weaknesses of the show. As opposed to inaccurate perceived weaknesses of the show that are the result of having no idea what is in the show.

The anti-DS9 'joke' that was put in the B5 show seemed more like an attempt at obfuscation (to try to prevent those B5 fans who were on the fence about watching DS9 from doing so) than humor.